(Newser)
–
President's Trump's proposed travel ban suffered yet another defeat Thursday when the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a block on the part of the ban that suspends visas for people from six predominantly Muslim countries, CNBC reports. According to the Huffington Post, the ruling was made by 13 judges in Virginia. It upheld a March ruling from a Maryland district court, which found the president's travel ban violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution, the Guardian reports. The next stop for the travel ban, which is also being contested in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, is likely the Supreme Court.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals states it was "unconvinced" Trump's travel ban "has more to do with national security than it does with effectuating the president's proposed Muslim ban." CNN has the full text of the ruling. While the White House has said the ban is needed to keep the country safe, Trump's own statements have given reason to believe the ban is meant to target Muslims. For example, the president's campaign website once advocated a "total and complete shutdown" of Muslims entering the US. The judges ruled Trump's past statements should be considered in regard to the proposed ban. They also stated the president's power to control who enters the country is "broad" but not "absolute."

It's ok. Don't need the ban. Just fear of being here. Don't need the gov for that.

Reilley

May 26, 2017 12:58 AM CDT

The courts, in their arrogance think that they are immune! I will venture a guess that they will be proven wrong!

George939

May 25, 2017 11:47 PM CDT

To all that disputes this ruling, this is how they decided. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3457898/2-9-17-9th-Circuit-Order.pdf Our decision is guided by four questions: “(1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies.” ... We conclude that the Government has failed to clear each of the first two critical steps. We also conclude that the final two factors do not militate in favor of a stay. (judges appointed by bush, obama, clinton, decision unanimous) Based on the questions do you think trump admin answered those questions? btw there's more stuff to read, just click the link, there's really a ton of stuff to read on why they came to this decision, it's a lot of pages (more than normal) pointing out why the courts are involved to who has standing to a lot of stuff only legal beagles will get off on.